Yet another reason why <75Hz Refresh sucks

Terra said:
I looked into your claim about "Repetitive-Strain", and guess what I found out? :)
"Repetitive-Strain" dosn't affect your sight, but your eye-muscles :rolleyes:
It makes your eyes tired, but dos not cause any deteriation of sight...please come again, when you got facts, not disinformation :)
The eyesight is only depandt on the "lens" in the eyes, the muscles do squat to improve or impair sight :rolleyes:

Terra...
thats not totally true...your muscles are just as important to your eye sight. Hevent you noticed that when yourr eyes get tired your vision starts to go to shit? but if you squeeze you eye muscles your vision get normal again thats because the muscles play a role in the shape of your eye
 
Terra said:
I looked into your claim about "Repetitive-Strain", and guess what I found out? :)
"Repetitive-Strain" dosn't affect your sight, but your eye-muscles :rolleyes:
It makes your eyes tired, but dos not cause any deteriation of sight...please come again, when you got facts, not disinformation :)
The eyesight is only depandt on the "lens" in the eyes, the muscles do squat to improve or impair sight :rolleyes:

Terra...


shows what you know, muscles in eyes are what allows you to focus or blur on an object at distance or close up. If your eye muscles are constantly moving in the position to focus on something close, for example, a monitor for 7 hours a day for years, what do you think will happen? Oh thats right, you think nothing happens. What type of education do you have anyway that is making you comment as such? Or is this just more stubborn terra cant be wrong?

I highly suggest you look up information of how an eye works and what role the muscles play, its a hell of alot more then the lense. You were fine earlier when you were sticking with the argument that refresh rate isnt going to do all that much, but now you're just totally incorrect.
 
Komataguri said:
Well, Common sense is different then science.


You are mixing science with common sense.

Can you se the radiation, or are you born with the knowlegde?
Or did you get that knowlegde via. science?
Could you ask an uneducated ilitterate to swin in the reactor core..or would his "common logic" tell him that it was a bad thing? :rolleyes:

Science is full of people who care more about their own glory then the results, It is full of people who would rather forge results then to have something they believe be proven wrong.

Then how did we get this far?
The toothfariy gave us all our new technolgy/knowlegde? :rolleyes:

Scientific results, Until it is made unbiased by several dozens of independant tests and results, Is inherently fouled.

Strawman-attack...you just described science, but try and use that argument against science? :S *LOL*

It is flawed, because man himself is inherently flawed.

Now you sound even more like a religious creationist?

Another science example.


T-Rex. Science was adamant about it being a carnivore, Even tho there was no real proof to prove thus.

A lot of people would diagree with you...just look at the teeth...do the look like they where made for grassing?
And I suppose the dinosaur-bones with bitemarks from T-rex teeths dosn't ring a bell either?
Where do you get your knowlegde...books from 1917 or before or what?!

They also did not wish to believe it could have been a caring parent of its offspring, All on off the hip assumptions.

Can I borrow you magiacl crystal ball that let you peek into the minds of others? :)

Even today they do not want to hear research or ideas that differ from them. Because they have become comfortable with the idea of it being a violent carnivore that had no love for its children, and do not want to deal with changing their minds.

Could you post some links/books that support you statements, because so far you have been rating on, with IMHO, very little foundation in reality?


If you believe science is a perfect art, that is uncorrupted by the inherent corruption of man, Then I think we have bigger things to worry about then monitors and eye damage.

Strawman attack...I never claimed scince to be infailureble, you invent arguments, not good debating tatics...
I have a little ting to you about science, from Phil Plait, the owner of http://www.badastronomy.com/

I know a place where the Sun never sets.

It’s a mountain, and it’s on the Moon. It sticks up so high that even as the Moon spins, it’s in perpetual daylight. Radiation from the Sun pours down on there day and night, 24 hours a day—well, the Moon’s day is actually about 4 weeks long, so the sunlight pours down there 708 hours a day.

I know a place where the Sun never shines. It’s at the bottom of the ocean. A crack in the crust there exudes nasty chemicals and heats the water to the boiling point. This would kill a human instantly, but there are creatures there, bacteria, that thrive. They eat the sulfur from the vent, and excrete sulfuric acid.

I know a place where the temperature is 15 million degrees, and the pressure would crush you to a microscopic dot. That place is the core of the Sun.

I know a place where the magnetic fields would rip you apart, atom by atom: the surface of a neutron star, a magnetar.

I know a place where life began billions of years ago. That place is here, the Earth.

I know these places because I’m a scientist.

Science is a way of finding things out. It’s a way of testing what’s real. It’s what Richard Feynman called “A way of not fooling ourselves.”

No astrologer ever predicted the existence of Uranus, Neptune, or Pluto. No modern astrologer had a clue about Sedna, a ball of ice half the size of Pluto that orbits even farther out. No astrologer predicted the more than 150 planets now known to orbit other suns.

But scientists did.

No psychic, despite their claims, has ever helped the police solve a crime. But forensic scientists have, all the time.

It wasn’t someone who practices homeopathy who found a cure for smallpox, or polio. Scientists did, medical scientists.

No creationist ever cracked the genetic code. Chemists did. Molecular biologists did.

They used physics. They used math. They used chemistry, biology, astronomy, engineering.

They used science.

These are all the things you discovered doing your projects. All the things that brought you here today.

Computers? Cell phones? Rockets to Saturn, probes to the ocean floor, PSP, gamecubes, gameboys, X-boxes? All by scientists.

Those places I talked about before—you can get to know them too. You can experience the wonder of seeing them for the first time, the thrill of discovery, the incredible, visceral feeling of doing something no one has ever done before, seen things no one has seen before, know something no one else has ever known.

No crystal balls, no tarot cards, no horoscopes. Just you, your brain, and your ability to think.

Welcome to science. You’re gonna like it here.


I don't know why you've got your panties in such a bunch and are looking to start an argument, either

I donøt like lies, I don't like myth spread as thruth, simple as that.
That you have no problem with false information/lies is your problem not mine....

Oh, And in english..We have a word for you, to. But I'm to much of a gentleman to say it.

Chicken :)

Terra...
 
cell_491 said:
thats not totally true...your muscles are just as important to your eye sight. Hevent you noticed that when yourr eyes get tired your vision starts to go to shit? but if you squeeze you eye muscles your vision get normal again thats because the muscles play a role in the shape of your eye

That effect is less than 0.25 on each eye, an infact you can get a better effect by applying pressure om your eye-sockets with your fingers ;)

Terra...
 
Shifra said:
shows what you know, muscles in eyes are what allows you to focus or blur on an object at distance or close up. If your eye muscles are constantly moving in the position to focus on something close, for example, a monitor for 7 hours a day for years, what do you think will happen? Oh thats right, you think nothing happens. What type of education do you have anyway that is making you comment as such? Or is this just more stubborn terra cant be wrong?

I highly suggest you look up information of how an eye works and what role the muscles play, its a hell of alot more then the lense. You were fine earlier when you were sticking with the argument that refresh rate isnt going to do all that much, but now you're just totally incorrect.

Ask your eyedoctor..I have asked mine as I am shortsighted(-3.25 on each eye).
Your eyes dosn't get bad from usng them..stop thnking of them as a light-bubl with limited lifespan.
In order for your eyesight to deterioate 2 things must happen:
A) Your lens must have the wrong shape.
B)Your lens get "clogged" up.

Terra - Reading in bad light or using a monitor 14 hours a day won't give you shortshight..fact ;)
 
cell_491 said:
haha...you sound like a girl thats why...you didnt sense the satire :D

I guees you havn't heard my voice then :p

Terra- I will never be able to hit the high C note ;)
 
Komataguri said:
Quick, everyone, go stare into the sun.


Because obviously it won't hurt your eyes!
sorry she doesnt understand satire so she probably will think your agreeing with her :D
 
Komataguri said:
Quick, everyone, go stare into the sun.


Because obviously it won't hurt your eyes!

That would affect you retina, due to the high lux of light combined with a massive UV-light...
Your lens would be more or less unaffected, so your eye would be able to focus, but you wouldn't see anything because your destroyed your retina...

Terra - But nice try to eveade/derail the topic ;)
 
I've used 85hz for like 3 years. any time i see 60hz, my eye starts to make me feel very fucking tired, gives me a killer headache that not 5 aspirins can help, make me want to itch and gouge out my eyes, feel physically weaker, lost 50 IQ points, flashed in my head with disturbing images like The Ring movie, and cold chills run through my spine.

Any monitors running at 60hz, and if I have a gun on me, I'll immediately shoot the monitor just to feel fine.

Anyone knows which CRT monitor can do 100hz at 1600x1200?
 
Mr. Stryker said:
I've used 85hz for like 3 years. any time i see 60hz, my eye starts to make me feel very fucking tired, gives me a killer headache that not 5 aspirins can help, make me want to itch and gouge out my eyes, feel physically weaker, lost 50 IQ points, flashed in my head with disturbing images like The Ring movie, and cold chills run through my spine.

Any monitors running at 60hz, and if I have a gun on me, I'll immediately shoot the monitor just to feel fine.

Anyone knows which CRT monitor can do 100hz at 1600x1200?
i have an old aoc 19" pure flat that does 85hz @ 1600x1200
 
i THINK the lower the resolution, less the refresh rate will hurt your eyes. I'm not sure on this though
 
erf said:
are you guys being serious? i've never been able to tell the difference...is it as noticeable as 30fps to 60fps?

Yes. There are other people who don't notice the difference. Here at the office, everytime I see someone with a low refresh rate, I change them to proper rates... and then I ask them...

me: SEE? IT'S ALL BETTER ON THE EYES NOW.

him: REALLY? WHAT HAPPENED? I DON'T SEE ANYTHING DIFFERENT.

:rolleyes:
 
That's because moving up isn't NEARLY as noticable as moving down. I dealt with 60Hz just fine for years, but I've been running 85Hz 1600x1200 on my new monitor. I knocked it down to 60Hz just to see what it was like, and I started feeling nauseous after only a few minutes.
 
Flak Monkey said:
My family thinks I'm crazy about things like this to. I can definitely see the flickering at 60Hz (and 75Hz for that matter) and they can't tell the difference. I notice the flickering of florescent lights to, but not that badly. One thing I cant stand is when you have a tv siting idle with no sound and you can hear that really high pitched screeching noise coming out of it. Me and my friends insist we hear it but my parents and several of my friend think I'm insane. It kinda freaks them out when I walk into a room and notify them that they accidentally left the tv on :).
Wow I though I was going crazy hearing the tv... guess not

On the fps subject, anything over 31fps I don't notice the difference... 30 and under and it starts getting a little choppy.
 
Jicks said:
I'm glad somebody mentioned this. The problem people have is with OLD fluorescent lighting using magnetic ballasts. Modern fluorescent lighting (whether it be compact fluorescent or T8) use electronic ballasts that drive the lamps in the KHz range... meaning, they don't flicker at all I wish more people would realize the benefits of modern fluorescent lighting. It's far more efficient than just about any other type of indoor lighting, and the color rendering index can be very high if you use the right tubes (full spectrum). When I purchase a house, i;m going to look into using as much fluorescent lighting as I can, to save energy costs.
I'm changing the lights at work to an 85CRI and 5000K color. Whoever said 4100K was cool white must be blind, that shit is yellow. At home all my lights are CFL's except for the 4 foot tubes in the kitchen.
 
Wow this thread really took off, I miss a few days and its 4 pages long. Alot of good points in in may I add! :)
 
epicengr said:
I'm changing the lights at work to an 85CRI and 5000K color. Whoever said 4100K was cool white must be blind, that shit is yellow. At home all my lights are CFL's except for the 4 foot tubes in the kitchen.


Same here, all of my lights [ except 1 dimming lamp, and 2 fixtures that are to small to accept the current size PCFs I have on hand . ] are 100watt output, 20watt energy use PCFs
 
Back
Top